Secondary Bacterial Infections in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis or Other Common Dermatoses.

Secondary bacterial infections of common dermatoses such as atopic dermatitis, ectoparasitosis, and varicella zoster virus infections are frequent, with Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes being the bacteria most involved. There are also Gram-negative infections secondary to common dermatoses such as foot dyshidrotic eczema and tinea pedis. Factors favoring secondary bacterial infections in atopic dermatitis, ectoparasitosis, and varicella zoster virus infections mainly include an epidermal barrier alteration as well as itch. Mite-bacteria interaction is also involved in scabies and some environmental factors can promote Gram-negative bacterial infections of the feet. Furthermore, the bacterial ecology of these superinfections may depend on the geographical origin of the patients, especially in ectoparasitosis. Bacterial superinfections can also have different clinical aspects depending on the underlying dermatoses. Subsequently, the choice of class, course, and duration of antibiotic treatment depends on the severity of the infection and the suspected bacteria, primarily targeting S. aureus. Prevention of these secondary bacterial infections depends first and foremost on the management of the underlying skin disorder. At the same time, educating the patient on maintaining good skin hygiene and reporting changes in the primary lesions is crucial. In the case of recurrent secondary infections, decolonization of S. aureus is deemed necessary, particularly in atopic dermatitis.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms. SEARCH METHODS: For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety). MAIN RESULTS: This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Necrotizing soft tissue infections in critically ill neutropenic patients: a French multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are rare life-threatening bacterial infections. Few data are available regarding neutropenic patients with NSTIs. Our objectives were to describe the characteristics and management of neutropenic patients with NSTIs in intensive care units (ICUs). We conducted a retrospective multicentre cohort study in 18 ICUs between 2011 and 2021. Patients admitted with NSTIs and concomitant neutropenia at diagnosis were included and compared to non-neutropenic patients with NSTIs. The relationship between therapeutic interventions and outcomes was assessed using Cox regression and propensity score matching. RESULTS: 76 neutropenic patients were included and compared to 165 non-neutropenic patients. Neutropenic patients were younger (54 ± 14 vs 60 ± 13 years, p = 0.002) and had less lower limb (44.7% vs 70.9%, p < 0.001) and more abdomino-perineal NSTIs (43.4% vs 18.8%, p < 0.001). Enterobacterales and non-fermenting gram-negative bacteria were the most frequently isolated microorganisms in neutropenic patients. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in neutropenic than in non-neutropenic patients (57.9% vs 28.5%, p < 0.001). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality in univariable Cox (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.23-0.82], p = 0.010) and multivariable Cox (adjusted HR = 0.46 95% CI [0.22-0.94], p = 0.033) analyses and after overlap propensity score weighting (odds ratio = 0.25 95% CI [0.09; 0.68], p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Critically ill neutropenic patients with NSTIs present different clinical and microbiological characteristics and are associated with a higher hospital mortality than non-neutropenic patients. G-CSF administration was associated with hospital survival.

[Diagnosis of severe skin infections, epidemiology and clinical semiology]. / Diagnostic des infections cutanées graves, épidémiologie et sémiologie clinique.

DIAGNOSIS OF SEVERE SKIN INFECTIONS, EPIDEMIOLOGY AND CLINICAL SEMIOLOGY. Serious skin infections are mainly represented by necrotizing soft-tissue infections (NSTI). They are rare but associated with a high mortality rate and severe long-term sequelae. Despite their relatively low incidence, most physicians may see at least one case of NSTI throughout their career. The main difficulty lies in establishing an early diagnosis with a rapid distinction of necrotizing soft tissue infections from non-necrotizing soft tissue infection. Early diagnosis and surgical management are major prognostic factors.

DIAGNOSTIC DES INFECTIONS CUTANÉES GRAVES, ÉPIDÉMIOLOGIE ET SÉMIOLOGIE CLINIQUE. Les infections cutanées graves sont essentiellement représentées par les infections nécrosantes des tissus mous, ou dermohypodermites bactériennes nécrosantes-fasciites nécrosantes (DHBN-FN). Elles sont rares mais associées à une mortalité élevée et à de lourdes séquelles à long terme. Malgré leur incidence relativement faible, la plupart des médecins peuvent être amenés à voir au moins un cas de DHBN-FN au cours de leur carrière. La principale difficulté réside dans le fait d'établir un diagnostic précoce, avec une distinction rapide du caractère nécrosant de la dermohypodermite bactérienne. La précocité du diagnostic et de la prise en charge chirurgicale sont des facteurs pronostiques majeurs.

[Differential diagnoses severe skin infections]. / Diagnostics différentiels des infections cutanées graves.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSES SEVERE SKIN INFECTIONS. The diagnosis of necrotizing soft tissue infection is a difficult clinical diagnosis, confirmed by surgical exploration and requiring urgent surgical treatment. The main differential diagnoses are non-necrotizing soft tissue infection, pyoderma gangrenosum, acute leg ischaemia, compartment syndrome and diabetic foot infection. It is important to know how to recognise these differential diagnoses because the management sometimes differs radically with, in the case of pyoderma gangrenosum, a risk of aggravation in the event of surgery.

DIAGNOSTICS DIFFÉRENTIELS DES INFECTIONS CUTANÉES GRAVES. Le diagnostic des dermohypo dermites bactériennes nécrosantes-fasciites nécrosantes (DHBN-FN) est un diagnostic clinique difficile, confirmé par l'exploration chirurgicale et qui nécessite un traitement chirurgical en urgence. Les principaux diagnostics différentiels sont les dermohypodermites bactériennes non nécrosantes (DHBNN), le pyoderma gangrenosum, l'ischémie aiguë de jambe, le syndrome des loges et l'infection du pied diabétique. Il est important de savoir reconnaître ces diagnostics différentiels car la prise en charge diffère parfois radicalement avec, dans le cas du pyoderma gangrenosum, un risque d'aggravation en cas de chirurgie.

Necrotising soft-tissue infections.

The incidence of necrotising soft-tissue infections has increased during recent decades such that most physicians might see at least one case of these potentially life-threatening infections in their career. Despite advances in care, necrotising soft-tissue infections are still associated with high morbidity and mortality, underlining a need for continued education of the medical community. In particular, failure to suspect necrotising soft-tissue infections, fuelled by poor awareness of the disease, promotes delays to first surgical debridement, amplifying disease severity and adverse outcomes. This Review will focus on practical approaches to management of necrotising soft-tissue infections including prompt recognition, initiation of specific management, exploratory surgery, and aftercare. Increased alertness and awareness for these infections should improve time to diagnosis and early referral to specialised centres, with improvement in the prognosis of necrotising soft-tissue infections.

Safety and efficacy of high-dose clobetasol propionate 0.05% in cutaneous lichen planus.

Cutaneous lichen planus is a highly pruritic dermatosis with an unmet need in its management. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term effect and tolerance of high doses of clobetasol propionate 0.05% in cutaneous lichen planus. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study from 2017 to 2021. All adults treated with high-dose (>5 g/day) clobetasol propionate 0.05% for cutaneous lichen planus were included. Patients with less than 10% affected body surface area at initial presentation or who received concomitant systemic therapy were excluded. The primary endpoint was the rate of complete remission by week 16. Secondary endpoints included maximum daily and median cumulative doses, reduction in pruritus and occurrence of adverse events. Fifty-seven patients, 60% female, with a mean age of 48 years (min-max,18-83) were included. Cutaneous lichen planus had been present for a median duration of 2 months at initial presentation (min-max, 1-4) and involved a median body surface area of 27%. Pruritus was reported by 55/57 (96%) patients. At week 16, 41/57 (72%) patients had achieved complete remission without treatment modification, among whom 25/41 (61%) had achieved it at week 6. The median daily and cumulative doses were, respectively, 20 g/day (IQR, 10-20) and 560 g (IQR, 320-925). Three patients experienced mild adverse events. No statistical association was demonstrated between the duration of the disease before treatment initiation and clinical response. In conclusion, high-dose clobetasol propionate 0.05% seems to be an effective, well-tolerated, and easy-to-implement treatment for cutaneous lichen planus.

Healthcare trajectory of critically ill patients with necrotizing soft tissue infections: a multicenter retrospective cohort study using the clinical data warehouse of Greater Paris University Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing skin and soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are rare but serious and rapidly progressive infections characterized by necrosis of subcutaneous tissue, fascia and even muscle. The care pathway of patients with NSTIs is poorly understood. A better characterization of the care trajectory of these patients and a better identification of patients at risk of a complicated evolution, requiring prolonged hospitalization, multiple surgical re-interventions, or readmission to the intensive care unit (ICU), is an essential prerequisite to improve their care. The main objective of this study is to obtain large-scale data on the care pathway of these patients. We performed a retrospective multicenter observational cohort study in 13 Great Paris area hospitals, including patients hospitalized between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 in the ICU for surgically confirmed NSTIs. RESULTS: 170 patients were included. The median duration of stay in ICU and hospital was 8 (3-17) and 37 (14-71) days, respectively. The median time from admission to first surgical debridement was 1 (0-2) day but 69.9% of patients were re-operated with a median of 1 (0-3) additional debridement. Inter-hospital transfer was necessary in 52.4% of patients. 80.2% of patients developed organ failures during the course of ICU stay with 51.8% of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, 77.2% needing vasopressor support and 27.7% renal replacement therapy. In-ICU and in-hospital mortality rates were 21.8% and 28.8%, respectively. There was no significant difference between patients with abdomino-perineal NSTIs (n = 33) and others (n = 137) in terms of in-hospital or ICU mortality. Yet, immunocompromised patients (n = 43) showed significantly higher ICU and in-hospital mortality rates than non-immunocompromised patients (n = 127) (37.2% vs. 16.5%, p = 0.009, and 53.5% vs. 20.5%, p < 0.001). Factors associated with a complicated course were the presence of a polymicrobial infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR = 3.18 (1.37-7.35); p = 0.007], of a bacteremia [aOR = 3.29 (1.14-9.52); p = 0.028] and a higher SAPS II score [aOR = 1.05 (1.02-1.07); p < 0.0001]. 62.3% of patients were re-hospitalized within 6 months. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective multicenter study, we showed that patients with NSTI required complex management and are major consumers of care. Two-thirds of them underwent a complicated hospital course, associated with a higher SAPS II score, a polymicrobial NSTI and a bacteremia.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety. SEARCH METHODS: For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety). MAIN RESULTS: This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.